Senate
15 July 1931

12^th Parliament · 1^st Session

MACMILLAN REPORT
QUESTION
- UNEMPLOYED WAR PENSIONERS IN CANBERRA
QUESTION
- REPORT ON COMMUNISM
QUESTION
- HOME PURCHASERSSUPERANNUATION SCHEME
QUESTION
- WAR SERVICE HOMES: EVICTIONS
QUESTION
- CANADIAN TRADE TREATY
QUESTION
- COMMONWEALTH PUBLIC SERVANTS
QUESTION
- NEW SOUTH WALES GOVERNMENT LOTTERY
QUESTION
- AUSTRALIA’S LONDON INDEBTEDNESS
QUESTION
- INDEBTEDNESS OF NEW SOUTH WALES
FINANCIAL EMERGENCY BILL
- Second Reading
PENSIONS IN DANGER
- What Mk. Lyons Proposes
COMMONWEALTH DEBT CONVERSION BILL
INVALID AND OLD-AGE PENSIONS APPROPRIATION BILL 1931
ADJOURNMENT

The President (Senator the Hon. W. Kingsmill) took the chair at 3 p.m., and read prayers.

page 3850

MACMILLAN REPORT

Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE.According to cablegrams published in Australian newspapers, a royal commission in Great Britain, known as the Macmillan Commission, has just presented a report upon central banking and monetary systems, and I should like to know if the Government will arrange through the High Commissioner to have a number of copies of the report of the commission forwarded as early as possible so that honorable senators may be able to make use of the findings of the commission in discussing legislation relating to central banking?

Senator BARNES:
Vice-President of the Executive Council · VICTORIA · ALP

– I believe that the Government has already taken steps to secure copies of the document which, from what one can gather from the cablegrams, must be of a most interesting nature.

Senator Sir George Pearce:

– I hope that the copies obtained will be more than the usual number, which I understand is two.

page 3850

QUESTION

UNEMPLOYED WAR PENSIONERS IN CANBERRA

Senator COOPER:
QUEENSLAND

– I ask the Leader of the Government in the Senate the following question, without notice: -

Has he noticed in to-day’s issue of the Canberra Times the statement that returned soldiers who arc in receipt of a war pension and are at present unemployed in Canberra, are to be deprived of food relief to the extent of the amount of pension drawn? Is it a fact that the Canberra police have received- instructions to put this into effect; if so, will the Government take action to see that these men’s pensions are safeguarded?

Senator BARNES:
ALP

– I understand that a statement is being made on the subject in another place this afternoon, but I ask the honorable senator to give notice of his question.

Senator FOLL:
QUEENSLAND

– In that connexion, I should like the Minister to explain why important ministerial statements are not also made in the Senate. Quite recently a statement was made in another place upon the decisions arrived at by a special committee appointed to deal with the proposed reductions of war pensions, and in. another case a report of the proceedings at the last Imperial Conference was made in another place, but in neither instance was a statement made in this chamber.

Senator BARNES:

– I was under the impression that every ministerial statement made in another place had also been made in this chamber.

Later:

Senator DOOLEY:
Assistant Minister assisting the Minister for Works and Railways · New South WalesAssistant Minister · ALP

– by leave - The following statement was made in another place this afternoon by the Minister for Home Affairs (Mr. Blakeley) concerning rations allowed to soldier pensioners, in regard to which questions were asked in the Senate earlier this afternoon : -

I have seen the vindictive and political attack upon myself, characteristic of the Canberra Times. In view of the gross misrepresentation of the position, and in anticipation of questions, I have prepared the following statement: -

Upon assuming office the Government made No. 4 camp available to the travelling unemployed; there water, sewerage, wood, and light are provided. It is probably the best unemployed camp in Australia, and 1 invite honorable members to inspect it at any time. Incoming and outgoing rations on a liberal scale are given. Recently the Government of New South Wales refused to issue rations to any travellers whowere temporarily camped within the Federal Capital Territory, and I was confronted by about 130 men who were in dire need. They were suffering, and I placed them upon the Canberra ration list. The camp was made available only to those who were in need, and. was never meant to’ be used by those who had an income. I was advised, however, that amongst the inmates were men who were not in want, and were in receipt of an income up to £2 a week; these men were occupying space at the camp, and were receiving relief. I then gave instructions that the New South Wales regulations restricting the relief to be given to those in receipt of income and applying for rations should be generally applied, with the qualification, however, that I would personally investigate any such cases. In New South Wales, the military pensionsof applicants for relief and of members of the same family as the applicant are taken into consideration before rations are granted. This practice is not strictly observed in the Federal Territory, but each case is separately considered. Owing to the fact that accommodation is available in the camp for only130 men and’ that the camp is reserved for those in dire need, this restriction was applied. Three cases have already been referred to me, and are now being investigated. An interim report shows that one man is in receipt, of a war pension of 8s. fid. a week, and has not been refused ration relief. The other two cases are being reviewed. I assure honorable members that the Government is not only caring for the unemployed residents of Canberra, but is doing more than its fair share to relieve the State of New South Wales of its responsibility for travelling unemployed. Up to 1,300 rations monthly have been issued to travelling unemployed by the Commonwealth Government. Large quantities of clothing during the last eighteen months have also been distributed, and as further material, including military stores, becomes available, this practice will be continued. From the foregoing facts, it will be seen that the newspaper report is a gross misrepresentation of the facts.

The following, papers were presented ; -

Sales Tax Assessment Acts - Regulations amended - Statutory Rules 1931, No. 87.

Dairy Produce Export Control Act - Regulations amended - Statutory Rules 1931, No. 84.

page 3851

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH PUBLIC SERVANTS

Number and Salaries Paid

Senator BARNES:
ALP

– a reply will be furnished as soon as possible to a question asked by Senator Duncan concerting the number of Commonwealth public servants and the total -salaries paid during certain years.

page 3851

QUESTION

NEW SOUTH WALES GOVERNMENT LOTTERY

Is it a fact, as reported in yesterday’s issue of the Canberra, Times, that lottery prizes in the New South Wales Government lottery will not be subject to federal taxation?

Senator BARNES:
ALP

– Lottery prizes are not subject to income tax under any provision of the Commonwealth Income.

Tax Assessment Act. The provision under which lottery prizes were formerly subject to income tax was repealed in 1923.

page 3852

QUESTION

AUSTRALIA’S LONDON INDEBTEDNESS

Has he noticed in yesterday’s issue of the Canberra Times newspaper a reported cable reading as follows : - “ London, Monday. The financial writer of the Daily Herald says, Australia has every reason to congratulate herself on the remarkable performance of reducing the London indebtedness by £21,000,000. The Treasurer (Mr. Theodore) has every reason to take pride in the fact’ “?

Is it a fact that the London indebtedness of the Commonwealth has been reduced by £21,000,000?

Senator BARNES:
ALP

– The answers are as follow: -

Yes.
Apparently the cable refers to the reduced amounts owing to the Westminster Bank and the public in London in respect of shortterm indebtedness (including overdrafts) of the Australian Governments. As shown in the budget speech, there has been a reduction of £12,900,000 in this indebtedness.

page 3852

QUESTION

INDEBTEDNESS OF NEW SOUTH WALES

Amendment of Financial Agreement

Senator LYNCH:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister, upon notice -

Does the Government think it is either just or proper to call upon the people of the poorer States of the Commonwealth to pay the debts of the rich State of New South Wales? s
Will the Government so amend the financial agreement as to acquire power to hold the members of any future State government and their supporters in Parliament jointly and severally responsible for the fraudulent non-payment of debt to the Federal Government, in the same way as Canadian bankers are dealt with under Canadian law?
Will the Government, in the event of passing such legislation, make it retrospective and applicable to New South Wales?

Senator BARNES:
ALP

– The answers are as follow: -

As the question of payments due by New South Wales to the Commonwealth is sub judice, it is undesirable that any comment be made. 2 and 3. It is not practicable to adopt the suggestion of the honorable senator.

page 3852

FINANCIAL EMERGENCY BILL

Second Reading

Debate resumed from 14th of July (vide page 3799), on motion by Senator Barnes -

That the bill be now read a second time.

Senator HOARE:
South Australia

; - I suppose that practically every one in Australia is cognizant of the distressing times through which the Commonwealth is passing, and of the difficult problems with which the Government has to deal. In these circumstances they have some sympathy with the Government in its efforts to restore financial stability. Probably that is why honorable senators supporting this measure have made apologies for it, and for supporting the reductions in wages and invalid and old-age and war pensions for which it provides. Do such apologiessuggest that the proposals embodied in this measure are more or less morally wrong, and that by the introduction of this measure the Government is endeavouring to legalize a moral wrong? In my opinion these reductions are both morally and economically wrong, and will not have the effect claimed by those supporting them. My memory carries me back to the time when those now occupying the Opposition benches were endeavouring to make a severe reduction in certain allowances to members of the Public Service. On that occasion ex-Senator Needham, who was then the Leader of the Labour, party in the Senate, together with all his followers, virtually raised the roof of this building in protesting against the action which the Government then proposed. The members of the Labour party at that time were strongly opposed to the reductions then proposed. They contended that Parliament was not. the authority to reduce wages or allowances and that such reductions should be made by the Arbitration Court or some other such tribunal.

Senator Rae:

– There is no proper place in which to reduce wages.

Senator HOARE:

– I prefer not to say anything about that just now. I invite honorable senators to consider what this reduction means to those of our worthy pioneers who depend upon the pension for sustenance in their declining years.

– The honorable senator ought to know me better.

Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE:

– “Were the gaol birds singing?

Senator HOARE:

Senator KNEEBONE:
South Australia

– I have already expressed my attitude towards what . is known as the plan, and as this bill is one of the legs of that comprehensive indivisible structure, to be consistent, I must oppose it. I have already stated my opposition to the agreement bill, which has not yet reached this chamber, and to the conversion bill, which passed through this chamber yesterday. The bill now before us is the most drastic of all the measures brought forward to give effect to the plan. It aims primarily at the dislocation of the accepted policy of arbitration. It gives to Ministers and to others, but principally to Ministers, authority to deal with the salaries and conditions of labour of employees of the Commonwealth regardless of existing awards or agreements. In short, it means the parliamentary fixation of wages, salaries and conditions. At the present time this may be a good thing, but the time may come when it is not a good thing for the Parliament of this country to fix wages and conditions of labour. The bill provides for the appointment of a committee, consisting of a representative of the Public Service Board, the Public Service Arbitrator, and a government appointee. The suggestion that the employees likely to be affected should have the right of representation on that committee has not been accepted. The people vitally concerned will, therefore, have no representation, yet the committee may make recommendations to the Minister in regard to the salaries and conditions of labour of employees who are already under federal arbitration awards, or awards of State courts or industrial tribunals, and in regard to employees, such as female office cleaners, who are not under any award. Salaries of persons under contract will be altered. A man working for the Commonwealth Government under an agreement may have the terms of that agreement arbitrarily changed or repudiated by a Minister on the recommendation of this committee. It is a case of riding rough-shod over the principles of democratic control. If there is any truth in the statement that politics are only private morals translated into: public service, there is some justification for the allegation that private morals in this community have seriously deteriorated during the last decade. In fact, there are men in prison to-day who have committed less serious offences than are proposed to be legalized by this extraordinary measure. It permitsthe breaking of conditions of contract entered into with private citizens for the carrying out of certain work. There is a distinct departure from what have previouslybeen regarded as the fundamental principles of honesty and public service.

Senator Hoare has already alluded to the proposal to reduce the inadequate pittance provided by the Commonwealth forthe pioneers of this country. I endorse his statements. Although it has, no doubt, been proposed with the best of intentions, it seems to me to lack any element of sta tesman ship to say that the ship of State may be righted by taking 6d. a week from the pocket money of an inmate of an institution, reducing his allowance from 5s. 6d. to 5s. a week. Such pettifogging schemes will not bring about what the preposterous preamble to this bill describes as “ industrial and general prosperity.”

I shall not delay the Senate very long. Part VI of the bill refers to war pensions - a meed of recognition, all too inadequate, which this nation has bestowed on soldiers, sailors and nurses injured during the war. If any contract should be solemnly honoured, surely the promise to pay the soldiers, sailors and nurses the pensions to which they are entitled should be honoured. The harm and discredit which will accrue from a breaking of this contract will more than outweigh any good that may be achieved by saving a few shillings here and there from former soldiers, sailors and nurses. Having had an intimate acquaintance with a large number of the men who served overseas, and especially those wounded during the first two years of the war; having assisted in the formation of the London branch of the Aus tralian Natives Association, which, through the Anzac Buffet, helped these men while away from home, in addition to providing more than 1,000,000 free meals, and having also basked in the reflected glory of their deeds, I hesitate to even refer to this proposal to reduce war pensions. How we were thrilled by the memorable exploits of the Anzacs, who were described by a British officer as “ The bravest things God ever made “. Will Ogilvie, the Australian poet, in taking up that theme, wrote -

The skies that arched his land were blue,

His bush-born winds were warm and sweet,

And yet from earliest hours he knew

The tides ofvictory and defeat;

From fierce floods, thundering at his birth,

From red droughts ravening while he played,

He learned to fear no foe on earth - “ The bravest thing. God ever made “.

The bugles of the Motherland

Rang ceaselessly across the sea,

To call him and his lean brown band,

To shape Imperial destiny.

He went, by youth’s grave purpose willed,

The goal unknown, the cost unweighed,

The promise of his blood fulfilled - “ The bravest thing God ever made “.

We know - it is our deathless pride -

The splendour of his. first, fierce blow,

How, reckless, glorious, undenied,

He stormed those steel-lined cliffs, we know!

Andnone who saw him scale the height,

Behind his reeking bayonet blade,

Would rob him of his title right - “ The bravest thing God ever made “.

Bravest, where half a world of men

Are brave beyond all earth’s reward,

So stoutly none shall charge again

Till the last breaking of the sword;

Wounded, or hale, won home from war,

Or yonder by the Lone Pine laid -

Give him his due for evermore - “ The bravest thing God ever made “.

At this period, which is only sixteen years later, I do not propose to take any part in besmirching that fair page of this young nation’s history by supporting proposals, reeking as they are with repudiation, and particularly those which affect our returned soldiers. I shall oppose the bill as I have opposed other proposals, of this nature.

Senator PAYNE:
Tasmania

.- It is not my intention to discuss at length the proposals embodied in this measure at this juncture, as we shall have an opportunity when it is in committee to consider many of the important items which it contains. I should like, however, briefly to reply to the cutting speech of Senator Hoare, who has ignored the fact that a measure of this kind, providing as it does for a reduction in our national expenditure, is inevitable; and that unless drastic steps are taken by the Commonwealth in an endeavour to meet its commitments and balance its budgets, it is possible that the finances of this country may get into such a condition that no money will be available for the payment of salaries, wages or pensions.

Senator Hoare:

– We cannot balance budgets by sacking men.

Senator PAYNE:

– I am not dealing with a proposal which involves the sacking of men. There is nothing in the bill concerning such a proposal. This measure deals, among other things, with a reduction of the rates at present paid under our pension scheme.

Senator Hoare:

– Cutting wages means unemployment.

Senator PAYNE:

– In that connexion I refer the honorable senator to what lias occurred in Queensland where fully 50 per cent, of the unemployed have been absorbed as a result of the Government’s policy in reducing expenditure and the suspension of rural workers awards. When I was in Brisbane in June of last year, it presented a spectacle such as one would not expect to see in the capital city of such a productive State. Hundreds, and possibly thousands of young, vigorous men were eagerly awaiting sustenance at a depot near the Botanic Gardens. When visiting Brisbane again in August of the same year, I took a friend to the depot to witness this pitiable sight, and to impress upon him the state which many of the citizens of the capital city of Queensland had reached. But, to my surprise, I found only a few awaiting sustenance, and on making inquiries, I ascertained that the Government of the day had done the only thing that was possible in the circumstances. It had suspended certain awards, and in consequence, over 50 per cent, of the men who i&i previously been supplied with sustenance had been found employment, and were able to walk erect through the streets, feeling that they were earning money with which to provide themselves with the necessities of life.

Senator Kneebone:

– And this had been done by cutting down wages !

Senator PAYNE:

– No. By suspending’ awards and thus providing more employment for the people. If there is not sufficient money to pay award rates, surely it is reasonable to suggest that employment should be made available at lower rates. Immediately wages are reduced the cost of living automatically decreases.

I deplore as much as any one the necessity for the introduction of this measure, which provides for a reduction in the allowances of members of Parliament, the salaries of public servants, and in invalid, old-age and war pensions. I remind Senator Hoare that the allowances of members of Parliament, which were reduced last year, are now to be further reduced, making the reduction equivalent to that to be borne by members of the Public Service generally. I have no objection to the Government’sproposal in this respect; I believe that members of Parliament are prepared to make their sacrifice, in common with other members of the community.

In regard to the proposed reduction in the cost of the Public Service, we have to remember that the Commonwealth public servants occupy an absolutely sheltered position, and in that respect differ from other members of the community. Wet or dry, ill or well, whether business is thriving or otherwise, their rates of pay remain unaltered. There is no likelihood of them losing their employment. Moreover, they receive certain concessions and additions to their salary such as no other section of the community can ever expect. In these circumstances, it is reasonable that this huge body of public servants should make a sacrifice equivalent to that which is being made by those in private employment.

No one deplores the necessity for reducing invalid, old-age and war pensions more than I do; but we have to remember that we are driven to adopt this policy by dire necessity.

Senator Hoare:

– Not in regard to the cutting of old-age and invalid pensions.

Senator PAYNE:

– We know what our financial position is. If these reductions are not made, the Government will be unable to pay any pensions at all, which would be infinitely worse than the proposal now before the Senate. I have le greatest respect and admiration for the pioneers of this country who, during periods of health and strength, have rendered valuable service to the community, and, in many cases, have reared large families. We should do all we can for these people in their declining years, but we cannot possibly do more than the funds available will allow. It must not be forgotten that the proposed reduction in invalid and old-age pensions is not more than equivalent to the reduced cost of living as disclosed by the Commonwealth Statistician’s figures.

Senator Rae:

– They have already had their cut.

Senator PAYNE:

– That is not so. About’ five years ago the rate was increased to 20s. per week, and to-day pensioners enjoy privileges which previously were not available to them.

Senator Hoare also made a vigorous attack upon the Government in respect to its proposal to alter the system under which the “maternity allowance is paid. Surely the honorable senator cannot justify a continuance of a scheme reeking with inequalities. Is there any reason why the wife of John Smith, whose income may be £2,000 a year, should receive the maternity allowance of £5 when a child is born? When I suggested some years ago that the whole position should be reviewed so that those who did not need the allowance should not receive it, the members of the Labour party said that they did not believe in any scheme of differentiation. The figures published in the Commonwealth Year-Book disclose that everyone, irrespective of position, applied for the maternity allowance. Even a person in receipt of £20,000 a year was eligible to apply for the allowance, and if the money was not required to pay for medical or other attention it was used to purchase a goblet or a bracelet for the infant. As the money from which the allowance is paid is contributed by the poorest taxpayers among others, its payment in every case, regardless of the income of the claimant, cannot be regarded as other than a scandal. In 1921, I endeavoured to limit the payment of the maternity allowance to persons in receipt of moderate incomes, but what support did I receive from the members of the Labour party? They unitedly opposed the scheme, because they contended it was contrary to democratic principles to differentiate as between different classes of the community. They were agreeable to persons in poor circumstances contributing towards the payment of an allowance of £5 to those who did not need it.

Senator HOARE:

– Those who do not need it should not claim it.

Senator PAYNE:

– On page 691 of the Commonwealth Year-Booh for 1930, the total births for 1928-29 is shown as 129,480. On page 269 of the same publication the maternity claims during the same period are given as 132,304. Of that number 901 claims were rejected, leaving the number actually paid as 131,403, which is more than the actual number of births registered. If these figures are approximately correct, it is apparent that every eligible person submitted a claim. Regarding the proposal to reduce the pensions of returned soldiers, I am very glad that the Government has seen fit to accept the findings and recommendations of the soldiers’ committee that was appointed some time ago ; ‘ and it is specially pleasing to know that the basic rate on which pensions are granted is not to be interfered with. Practically, that means that the pensions which are paid to those soldiers who suffer from any war disability are not to be touched, the only pensions affected being those that are paid to dependants of pensioners. I am glad also that the pensions of widowed mothers of deceased unmarried members of the forces and of the widows and children of deceased members of the forces, are to be left intact. I realize, as clearly as any one can, that I still owe a debt to the brave men who were prepared to lay down their lives in order that we might live. No sacrifice that we may make can be in any way equivalent to that which they made for us. For that reason, I am especially glad that we have been able to devise means by which- the’ pensions payable in the cases I have named will be unaffected.

I support the second reading of the bill, although I regret the necessity for its introduction. I realize that the proposed economies are rendered urgently necessary by Australia’s financial position.

Senator DUNN:
New South Wales

.- I desire to preface my remarks on this bill by thanking the Senate for its courtesy in having granted me leave of absence for two months on account of illness arising out of my participation :in the late war.

It was not my intention to return to Canberra until I considered that I was completely recovered; but I felt that, as a returned soldier, I was in duty bound to attend the sitting to-day, so as to record a vote against this treacherous proposal of the Government.

There has been a great deal of prating and mouthing concerning what occurred during the dark years of the war. While I was overseas, I learned from the Australian newspapers that arrived at the different fronts on which the Australian troops were engaged, that the impression prevalent in Australia was that nothing was good enough for the Australian soldiers and their dependants. To-day, we Shave in control of the nation’s affairs a government that was returned a little under two years ago with a majority of seventeen, at an election which was fought as the result of the gage of battle having been thrown down by the BrucePage Government to decide whether the arbitration system should be retained or abolished. I was returned as a follower of that Government, and was appointed its Whip in the Senate. A few weeks ;ago I read in a Sydney newspaper the report of a speech by the honorable member for Hunter in another place (Mr. James), in the course of which he stated that, looking back at his experience as a member of the Labour party, he felt he 11]ad been dragged through a - sewer. My association with the Government up to the time when I was expelled from its caucus made me feel that I had lived in a sewer, because I witnessed the breaking of the sacred pledges of a party that had been built- up out of the tears and struggles of the working class of this country.

Senator Hoare has expressed sympathy with the position in which

Australia finds itself to-day. We all are in that sympathetic frame of mind. If sacrifice is necessary, let it be made in connexion with the salaries and other emoluments of members of Parliament, and of. those sections of the community which can afford it. Tens of thousands of men, many of whom were formerly business men, are to-day tramping the highways and byways. Australia is not responsible for ite present economic position; the difficulties with which she is confronted are international in their application. Despite the development of our huge primary resources and the resultant sales of our products in the markets of the world, our national income has declined to the extent of no less than £200,000,000/ According to the latest information available, the total number of unemployed in the United States of America is in the vicinity of 11,000,000, and similar conditions exist in the United Kingdom, Germany, France and Italy, despite the efforts in the lastnamed country of the great Mussolini, who has been hailed as Italy’s economic saviour.

The plan agreed upon at the recent conference of Premiers in Melbourne - which, we are told by the Government^ is alone capable of dragging Australia out of the mire - conforms expressly to that propounded by a recent visitor from Great Britain, Sir Otto Niemeyer, in conjunction with Professor Gregory. Those gentlemen put forward a definite scheme for the rehabilitation of Australia, and it has now been adopted by the Scullin Government. Whatever may be the view of other honorable senators, I regard the present Government as the scabbiest that has ever occupied the treasury bench in the Commonwealth Parliament. The success achieved by it at the Franklin byelection, which was rendered necessary by the death of the late Mr. Mcwilliams, was a tribute to its capacity; but it has since betrayed every fundamental principle of the Labour movement upon which it was elected.

According to a circular that has been issued by the Government, of which doubtless other honorable senators have received a copy, the Bruce-Page Government, during its six years tenure of office, spent out of revenue and loan funds no’ less than £500,000,000. The present Leader of the Opposition in the Senate (Senator Pearce) was the Leader of that Government in this chamber, and must accept responsibility for the condition in which Australia now finds itself, yet all that he and those who are associated with him can preach is a political jehad aiming at the reduction of salaries and pensions.

Senator Barnes:

– What does the honorable senator suggest should be done?

Senator DUNN:

– I shall tell the Leader of the Government before I sit down, and I shall repeat it in his home town - Ballarat. The honorable gentleman may laugh; but time is on our side. During the six years that Dr. Earle Page was Treasurer, his administration borrowed £125,000,000. The circular reads-

The federal Labour Government is blamed for all the ills from which the agricultural industry, the pastoral industry, and various other industries in Australia are suffering.

Those of our financial difficulties from which we are suffering more acutely than New Zealand or South Africa have their origin in the mismanagement of the finances in the ten years during which anti-Labour Governments ruled.

This circular was sent to me by the Prime Minister, but I have no doubt that “Kirribilli Ted “-Mr. Theodore- also had a hand in it.

Senator Thompson:

– I thought the Treasurer was a friend of the honorable senator.

Senator DUNN:

– Personally, I believe he is my friend. So also, I hope, is the honorable senator. But in the political sphere, the Treasurer must face up to the issue, and take his criticism. The circular goes on to state -

During the regime of Dr. Page as Treasurer, he built up a record which probably will not be eclipsed by any of his successors. In 1.927, Australian governments floated overseas eleven loans totalling £09,700,000. In 1928, five overseas loans were raised, totalling £30,500,000, and in 1929, up to the time Dr. Page went out of office, three overseas loans, aggregating £25,400,000, were floated by Australian governments. In a period of little under three years Australian govern ments, led by Mr. Bruce and Dr. Page, floated overseas £125,000,000- an amount of £0,000,000 for every two months.

We have it on the authority of the Commonwealth Statistician that the Australian Government has to find £55,000,000 in interest on Government borrowings, and judging by recent events, I have no hesitation in saying that the Government of Australia is not sitting on the treasury bench to-day. The Opposition is really the Government of this country. I feel compelled to say this, because this cowardly, callous, spineless, and politically gutless government, led by Mr. Scullin and Mr. Theodore, is not prepared to face the issue. But the time is coming when it will be forced to do so. If not to-morrow, then in about ten months’ time, it will be compelled to give an account of its stewardship to the people.

Its treatment of our war pensioners shows that it has nothing on Ned Kelly. In the Canberra Times of this morning’s date, there appears a statement that unemployed returned soldiers or sailors in Canberra in receipt of a war pension of 10s. a week or more are now to be denied rations. I have no doubt that Mr. Scullin or Mr. Theodore will to-night sit down to a good dinner; I hope also to do the same. But what about those unfortunate unemployed ex-soldiers, who are homeless and workless, and now are to be denied a government ration?

Senator BARNES:
ALP

– The honorable senator will be sorry that he has said this when he reads the reply of the Minister for Home Affairs.

Senator DUNN:

– I take full responsibility for all that I may say, and until I hear Mr. Blakeley’s explanation of this callous treatment of our war pensioners, I shall accept the statements that appear in the Canberra Times. Only a week or two ago one of our leading cartoonists, Mr. George Piney, a New Zealander by birth, and a returned soldier now resident in Sydney, dealing with the Government’s proposals to include war pensions in the general economy scheme, depicted a returned soldier prostrate, with his crutches beside him, and a bayonet, attached to the Union Jack, piercing his heart. The suggestion intended to be conveyed was that the war being over,. Australia had no further need of his services. The Leader of the Opposition (Senator Pearce) took umbrage at thecartoon. The right honorable gentleman was entitled to do that. In my opinion, it correctly interpreted the attitude of this

Government towards our returned soldiers, because no one will deny that, in this economy plan, they are getting the bayonet well and truly in the ribs.

The general scheme includes a number of financial measures to effect reductions in the salaries and wages of public servants, in invalid and old-age pensions, war pensions, maternity allowances, and also to curtail other social services. Honorable senators are expected to vote for it. I shall not do so. Before I would cast my vote for any reduction of pensions to our returned soldiers, I would cut off my hand, and allow the blood to flow into the gutters of Canberra. Other honorable senators will, no doubt, exercise their prerogative and vote in accordance with their political views. Because of the gross mismanagement of our finances by previous governments, a tremendous dead-weight burden of interest is now resting on the shoulders of Australian taxpayers, and I cannot help thinking that, in this economy scheme, every consideration is being shown to the bondholders. The British bondholder is to be sacrosanct..Whatever happens he must be paid his interest, but the Australian soldier and sailor, the Australian workers, and all our public servants have to bear their share of the burden. Nothing has been said, up to date, about the help which the Mother Country might very well give to Australia during this crisis. The financial interests of Great Britain are willing to give assistance to other countries, but not to Australia. Despite all that we have heard about the yellow peril, Chinese and Japanese freighters have been calling regularly at Australian ports to lift Australiangrown surplus wheat for the overseas markets.

This scabby Scullin Government-

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon W Kingsmill:

– Order!

Senator DUNN:

– I repeat that this Government has at last agreed to proposals which, for the most part, were suggested by Sir Otto Niemeyer when he visited Australia last year. The circular states further -

That colossal borrowing exhausted the London market forthis Government, and left a legacy of interest, sinking fund and exchange payments which is to-day the most serious aspect of our financial position.

In the six years that it held office, the imports of merchandise alone totalled £892,000,000, while the exports of merchandise amounted to only £832,000,000, leaving an adverse trade balance against Australia of £60,000,000 despite the fact that this was a period of prosperity and high prices.

I recall a statement made by Sir Otto Niemeyer to the effect that if the Commonwealth Government was prepared to scrap its tariff policy there would be plenty of money available in London to assist Australia over its difficulties. Of course it would suit the British manufacturing interests to see the Australian tariff wall lowered, because then they would ha.ve a much wider market for their output. Naturally enough, they haveno regard for the secondary industries of this country, and experience has shown that unless wegive them adequate protection, they will be unable to survive unfair overseas competition. New protection is one of the principal planks of the Australian Labour Party’s platform, but apparently, this Government is prepared to throw that overboard also, in order to satisfy the demands of British investors and ensure a more plentiful supply of money from outside sources. The circular goes on to state -

Now it is Dr. Page, and his new-found leader, Mr. Lyons, who are blaming this Government for a condition of things which can be directly traced to the extravagance and mismanagement of the last administration.

Mr. Lyons was for some time a responsible Minister in the Scullin Government. Up till a few months ago, I sat in the Labour caucus with him, and I well remember his strong opposition to any suggested reduction of invalid and oldage pensions. A big story could be told of the happenings in the party room when Mr. Lyons and certain other members, who have since left the party to join the Opposition, were in the Labour caucus. But that story cannot be told here, because I do not wish it to be said that, while a member of this chamber, I was guilty of any mean ordirty action. Therefore, I am not prepared to throw open the doors of caucus and reveal to honorable senators opposite anything that was said in caucus while Mr. Lyons and his friends were in the movement. It will be told on the hustings.

Senator Dooley:

– The honorable senator can tell all that he knows.

The PRESIDENT:

– The honorable senator would be out of order if he did so.

Senator DUNN:

– The Minister has invited me to tell all that I know. ‘ My reply is that there will be a time and place to warm him up.

The PRESIDENT:

– The honorable senator must not use threats.

Senator DUNN:

– I was merely replying to the invitation of the Minister to tell all that I know of caucus happenings. I do not propose to do that now.

The one clear issue before the Labour movement is to put into operation the first plank of its platform, which is the socialization of the means of production, distribution and exchange. Up to the present, that plank has been prostituted by this Government. To the best of my ability I shall preach that doctrine until the whole of the civilized world cancels its war debts, and establishes a 36-hour week in order to cope with the increased production due to the greater use of machinery. If the Leader of the Senate is not in agreement with the views I have expressed, I recommend him to spend a few hours in the parliamentary library studying the economic law of supply and demand. That is my answer to the Minister and to Senator Thompson.

Senator Thompson:

– It is not very practical.

Senator DUNN:

– It is. Not only President Hoover of the United States of America, but also many far-seeing men in other countries, realize that the world to-day is at the cross-roads, with almost every nation on the verge of either collapse or default. Britain has been relegated to the position of a second-class power, not because she believes in disarmament, but because economic laws have forced that proud nation from the strong position she held formerly. President Hoover and his responsible Ministers realize that Germany is on the verge of collapse, and that the rising tide of world thought demands for the workers better conditions than they have enjoyed in the past.

Let me again refer to the circular which I have mentioned in order to show what the Prime Minister had to say about pensions. I read -

page 3864

PENSIONS IN DANGER

What Mk. Lyons Proposes

Mr. Lyons and his followers urge that budgets should be balanced by reducing pensions and wages. The Federal Government will not agree to any cut in war, invalid and old-age pensions, which now total £20,000,000 a year, nor will it sanction any reduction in wages.

Time after time I have heard similar expressions by the Prime Minister in caucus. The right honorable gentleman said many times that rather than reduce invalid and old-age pensions he would relinquish office; that he would never prostitute the high ideals of the Labour movement by acquiescing in any reduction of pensions or salaries. Those were the proud words of the right honorable James Henry Scullin, P.O., by the grace of God, Prime Minister of Australia. The Chicago gangster, Al. Capone, has nothing on him. Although I have gained nothing from my two years of parliamentary life, rather than eat my words I would forfeit my seat in this Parliament, take my chance among my fellows by the wayside, and leave to the Opposition in this chamber and in another place the responsibility for reducing pensions. In fairness to the Opposition, I must say that the policy which it now supports has been its policy all along. Its members have preached that doctrine day and night. Indeed, the Bruce-Page Government fell because it advocated that policy. From every platform throughout the Commonwealth the members of the party, led by Mr. Bruce, said that if his government was again returned to power it would put that policy into operation. Because it advocated those ideas the Bruce-Page Government fell by the wayside. When I think of the present vacillating Labour Government - that spineless crew in another place - I can call them nothing but political prostitutes.

The . PRESIDENT.- Order! The honorable senator must withdraw that expression.

Senator DUNN:

– I withdraw it, Mr. President. I made it iri the heat of the moment. Quoting again from the clr- cular, I find that the Prime Minister also said -

It is easy to escape the heavy burden of governmental expenditure by striking a blow at old-age and returned soldier pensioners. No one deserves more from their country and, because of that, the Government is determined not to interfere with those citizens who have done so much for their country. In any case the mere objective of balancing budgets would not be achieved by a reduction in pensions.

What does the Government hope to gain by reducing pensions ? I am ashamed to think that I have ever been associated with a government which would do these things. In his policy speech delivered in Richmond, Victoria, the Prime Minister said that he would never do them. He has eaten his own words, and I have nothing but contempt for him. The circular from which I have quoted again credits the right honorable gentleman with having said -

The only way would be for the Opposition to wipe out pensions altogether and thus save £20,000,000 a year; there are men in the Opposition ranks who would not be averse from taking that step. It is only the fear of political consequences that deters them from destroying the only means of subsistence which thousands of their fellow Australians possess.

What does he mean by political consequences? I know what the consequences will be to him and a number of his followers because I know the mind of the people of New South Wales. I know how I feel about them. I can only say that should I happen along, as a political wayfarer, when they are addressing meetings, I shall insist that they speak the truth.The Government need make no mistake about that. Supporters of the Government will not in my presence endeavour to throw the blame on the Opposition and hope to escape. They will not be able to say that the Opposition forced the Government to do these things. That parrot cry will be of no value. The Opposition has at least been consistent, because thepolicy it now advocates has been its policy all along. As I have said, the Bruce-Page Government went down in battle fighting for it. On the occasion to which I have referred, the Prime Minister also said -

Since this Government took office, pensions have increased by £2,000,000 a year, due to the growth of unemployment.

Unfortunately, that is true. Large numbers of persons have, through force of circumstances, . been forced to apply for pensions - a thing which previously they were too proud even to contemplate. My experience is that the average Australian prefers to work for his bread and butter rather than depend on any government for sustenance. But these unfortunates have had to sink their pride, because stress of circumstances has forced them to seek assistance. My indignation is aroused when I think that this .so-called Labour Government should be the one to introduce these proposals. Let me again quote what the right honorable gentleman said some time ago -

What a deplorable plight would be that of the pensioners if they were without the assistance which the Government now grants them. That assistance would undoubtedly be endangered once the Opposition attained power. >

The Opposition is in power, to-day, both in another place and in this chamber. I shall not say more, because I realize that if I were to speak until next week my words would make no impression on the majority opposite. The gage of battle has been thrown down. I, for one, will never do anything to reduce pensions, salaries or wages, because I hold that ft properly constituted tribunal should be set up to deal with these matters. Already the workers have suffered a reduction of 10 per cent, in their wages ; and a further 10 per cent, is now contemplated. According to a statement, in the press this morning, His Excellency the GovernorGeneral, Sir Isaac Isaacs, is prepared to return to the Treasurer £2,500 out of his allowance, but I have not heard that any member of the judiciary has expressed his willingness to forgo any portion of his emoluments. There is a lot more that L could say. I might, for instance, refer to the proposal to reduce bounties, but I shall not do so now. I conclude by saying that to support this Government - the scabbiest Government Australia has known - in its proposals is more than I can do.

Senator LYNCH:
Western Australia

– I feel that I am expressing the views of every honorable senator when I say that no one takes any pleasure in> supporting a measure of this kind; but,, unfortunately, inexorable circumstances- have forced us to take the drastic action outlined in the bill. Only one course is open to us; we must perform this unpleasant task, regardless of consequences, otherwise, the country will soon be in a worse position than it is. The alternative is unthinkable. It is said that speech reveals the thoughts of the heart. The Senate comprises 36 members, but according to some honorable senators who have spoken, a minority in this chamber is composed of different and better clay from that which goes to make up the majority. I suppose they can indulge in that idle fancy as long as they please, but it is just as well to recall to their, minds what has been done in the past by a party of the same complexion as that which is now in Opposition, in respect of the very matter with which they, are now finding fault.

An invalid and old-age pension measure was first passed in the federal sphere by the Deakin Government, with the assistance of Labour supporters, and the rate of the pension was. fixed at 10s. a week. Since then there have been four separate increases, and of these three* have been made by a Liberal or Nationalist Government, not dependent on Labour support. It is, therefore, idle for three honorable senators opposite to say that the Opposition and its supporters have no sympathy with the old people of this country, that their hearts are steel, and that the only sample of pure molten, sympathy is to be found in the ranks of this defection of the Labour party. The very fact that the Liberals or Nationalists committed themselves to effect three separate increases of taxation to provide increases of pensions for the old people of this country is ample proof of where their sympathy lies.

It is within the memory of every honorable senator that the soldiers who went from Australia were given the highest pay, and had the best conditions of any other soldiers who fought in the recent war, or, indeed, in any previous war. The liberality of the conditions under which the soldiers left our shores to fight was the result of the direct action of a Liberal Government, although I was then in opposition to it. And the pensions awarded to those soldiers on their return, on the most liberal scale in any

British possession, were also given by an “ anti-Labour “ Government, as were also the gratuities about which we have heard so much criticism. Indeed, all for which the soldiers are indebted to the community was obtained for them or given to them by a Nationalist or Liberal Government.

In passing, I may point out that oldage pensions were paid in New Zealand, where there was no Labour party, and that it was a Liberal Government in the State of Victoria, under the leadership of Sir George Turner, which, some time prior to federation, and without the aid of Labour, brought in and passed the first old-age pension system in Australia. It is about time the three gentlemen opposite gave the devil his due even if it is that evil spirit. Senator Hoare actually frothed at the mouth this afternoon, and from other honorable senators we get words, words, words. Oh, the folly of words ! It is action that counts. That is why I am giving an unchallengeable recital of facts, and not the froth.ings of latter-day Labour.

Senator Hoare:

– “Who wanted to pay the soldiers ls. 3d. a day? It was a Nationalist.

Senator LYNCH:

– If I had times-

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon W Kingsmill:

– Order! The question before the Chair is the Financial Emergency Bill, and not a dispute as to who gave the soldiers this or that. Of course, I understand that the position has been somewhat forced on the honorable senator.

Senator LYNCH:

– Charges have- been flung across the chamber that we are opposed to this, that and the other thing, and I thought it about time the truth was made known. I do not care to have certain statements go forth unless they are accompanied by a repudiation.

Let me remind honorable senators what this party has done on behalf of the civil servants of the Commonwealth. We gave them the highest wages and the best conditions of any body of public servants in the Commonwealth. We gavethem an Arbitration Court, and child endowment, superannuation, and other advantages, which no other section of employees in Australia had previously received. We gave them other considerations involving very heavy expenditure, because we wanted to see a loyal and contented service. Yet they repaid our generosity by the basest ingratitude. Those are facts which cannot be contradicted.

Senator Hoare:

– The honorable senator was a Labour man.

Senator LYNCH:

– The honorable senator comes here from the Trades Hall in Adelaide. Trades halls are admirable institutions, and I hope that they will come into their own again, and enjoy once more the popular estimation in which they were once held. But judging by their present-day representatives, they are now evidently nothing but fattening paddocks for all the gabbling windbags in the land. They turn out a type of men who could not manage a duck-house if given control of it.

This afternoon we have heard, without rhyme or reason, one long, weary declaration of a wrecking. The policy enunciated has been simply that of pulling down, without a single suggestion of how to build up again, or meet the present situation. Lord Byron said -

Aman must serve his time to every trade,

Save censure - critics all are ready made.

Thu proposed increase in the income tax would only have the effect of taking more money out of industry and intensifying unemployment. At the present rate, income tax would reach vanishing point, because in time there would be nothing left to tax.

In regard to soldiers’ pensions, the original proposal was for a reduction of 20 per cent, throughout ; but an investigation was made by a committee representing returned soldier organizations, and I am pleased that that committee arrived at a series of decisions which were acceptable to the Government, and are embodied in this measure. It was decided, and properly accepted, that the pension should not be reduced in the case of the returned man himself, or of some of those who are directly dependent upon him. At the same time, however, the fact must not be overlooked that the returned soldiers are making a very great sacrifice on account of the reduction of the pensions of their dependants. I have no doubt, that our returned soldiers have, in this matter displayed the same spirit of self-sacrifice in the present emergency as they did when the call came to them in 1914. “ Peace hath its victories no less renowned than war.” But evidently some uneasiness is being felt about the probable effect of this scheme upon certain sections of our ex-service men. Yesterday I received the following telegram from Mr. Beyers, the secretary of the Limbless Soldiers Association, Sydney: -

This association views with grave apprehension amendment Financial Emergency .Bill, part 3 paragraph 3 (a). This would give too much discretionary power to commissions. Parliament should decide pensions matters or fix commission’s powers definitely.

Senator Barnes:

– That is being attended to.

Senator E B JOHNSTON:

– I am pleased to have the assurance of the Minister that the matter complained of by the Limbless Soldiers Association is to be attended to, because I am sure it is the wish of every member of the Senate that the Commonwealth should be generous in its treatment of all our war pensioners. That, I believe, is also the desire of the Government.

The salaries of members of Parliament are to be reduced. If one studies the history of the salary increases since the inception of federation, one is forced to the conclusion that, in this adjustment scheme, members escape somewhat lightly. Originally the remuneration of members of Parliament was fixed at £400 a year; before many years had elapsed it was raised to £600, and some years later to £1,000 a year. A few months ago, as the first instalment of the financial emergency plan, members suffered a reduction of £100 a year, and now they will lose another £100. If the reductions had been on the same scale as the increases, the amount to be deducted from members’ salaries would be much larger, and personally I should have preferred the Government to take that course. In this emergency parliamentary salaries should have been reduced to the original amount of £400 per annum.

I turn now to the proposed reduction of the gold bounty by 50 per cent. Compared with the proposals relating to other industries, gold-mining is hit pretty heavily. Bounties on production of cotton, flax, linseed, iron and steel products, Papua and New Guinea industries, power alcohol, wine export, &c., are to be reduced by only 20 per cent. I fail to understand why the gold-mining industry should have been singled out for such unfair treatment.

Senator Foll:

– It gets the advantage of the higher exchange rate.

Senator E B JOHNSTON:

– The same may be said of all the other export industries.

Senator Foll:

– But the bounty is not payable in all cases on the export production.

Senator E B JOHNSTON:

– That is true, but if a reduction of 20 per cent, in respect of other industries is regarded as a fair contribution to the rehabilitation scheme, why should not the gold-mining industry be treated in the same way? I object to this differentiation, and I also remind the Senate that, up to the present, no bounty has yet been paid to the goldmining industry. The bill authorizing payment of the bounty was passed only in December last, and the principal object in view was to attract outside capital, and so provide more employment. Moreover, the bounty is not payable in respect of the entire output, as is the case with other primary industries, but only on the excess production over the average of the three preceding years. Gold is the only commodity for which there is an unlimited market. Consequently, there can be no over-production, and unless those engaged in the industry undertake to work all available ore in a mine, whether it is profitable or not, they will not be eligible for the bounty. Naturally, this proposal to reduce the bounty by 50 per cent, is causing considerable concern, as will be seen from the following telegram which I have received from the Mayor of Kalgoorlie: -

Gold-fields people’ indignant at Federal Treasurer’s proposed reduction gold bounty and disregard of regrettable consequences which would accrue from reduced investment capital and employment and the injustice to Western Australia. Request you to do utmost to protect Western Australian interests and prevent reduction bounty.

The secretary of the Mining Association in Western Australia also sent a telegram to me in these terms -

The Mining Association of Western Australia Incorporated, urgently requests your most active endeavours to resist this unfair discrimination which the proposed reduction of gold bounty will entail as compared with reduction of bonuses to other industries.

The Treasurer (Mr. Theodore), in justification of this proposed reduction, said it would mean a saving of £100,000 in the expenditure for the current financial year, the amount available being reduced from £200,000 to £100,000. In my opinion, his figures are entirely wrong. I have examined the official returns of the gold yield in Western Australia from the 1st January to the 30th June last, and I find that the output was 225,283 oz., representing an increase of 29,197 oz. over the corresponding period of the previous year. From this it would seem that even if greater efforts are made by people engaged in industry to further increase the output, it is unlikely that the yield this year will be more than 70,000 oz. above the average for the previous three years, and on that basis the bounty as approved by Parliament’ will amount to £70,000 - not £200,000 as suggested by the Treasurer. I have also studied carefully the report of the Premiers Conference, and I failed to discover any reference to a reduction of the gold bounty. I am, therefore, forced to the conclusion that this proposal is outside the plan altogether, and. is really another gratuitous knock given to the gold-mining industry by the present Government. The Treasurer advanced two reasons why the reduction should be made. He said that it was justified on the ground that the rate of exchange had increased from £9 per cent, to over £30 per cent., but omitted to mention that, while this advance in the exchange rate is helpful to the gold-mining industry, it is equally helpful to all our other export industries which are assisted by means of bounties.

Senator McLachlan:

– But not quite to the same extent as the gold industry.

Senator E B JOHNSTON:

– I think it would be if the system of marketing our exports were up to date. The Treasurer stated also that the reduction in the gold bounty would bring it into line with the reductions of salaries, wages, pensions, and the other economies. That is not so, because, as I have already shown, bounties, in respect of other industries, are being reduced by only 20 per cent., whereas the gold bounty is being cut down by 50 per cent. I strongly object to this unfair discrimination, which really amounts to repudiation.

– I have supported every measure which I bave believed was in the interest of the wheat-farmers of this country. Had Senator Dunn ‘ worked as hard for the wheat-growers as be worked to get Mr. Theodore reinstated in the Ministry, the wheat-farmers might have had a guaranteed price paid to them for their wheat months ago. I appeal to the Government, even at this late hour, to accept the recommendations of the financial experts and economists in relation to tariff reduction. I also urge that the reduction of the gold bounty should not be more than the 20 per cent, which will apply to other bounties. I hope that the Government will see the wisdom of reducing the customs duties by at least 20 per cent. It would be better to reduce the tariff by 50 per cent, and the gold bounty by 20- per cent, than to do what the Government now proposes. Were my suggestion accepted, public servants and pensioners would be better able to meet their obligations. I strongly appeal to the Government to treat the sugar industry as other industries are being treated under this measure. If the Government would adopt these suggestions, its proposals would be more acceptable to the people, particularly those living in rural areas.

Sitting suspended from 6. IS to 8 p.m.

Senator RAE:
New South Wales

– In the discussion of this bill those who are opposed to the present proposals have been subjected to a great deal of criticism on the ground that they have put forward no alternative, and the proposal to reduce pensions, salaries and so forth, has been justified on the ground that if these reductions are not made a worse reduction will have to follow. With the reductions already proposed, and the anticipated saving in interest payments as the result of the proposed conversion loan, there will still be a deficit of considerable magnitude. There is, therefore, a common admission on the part of those who believe in these proposals that they are but a partial remedy. For my part I believe- that they will prove to be useless. I cannot see how it can be contended that even if these reductions and savings go some little distance towards balancing the budget they will do anything to bring about that increase of employment, which it is said will result from the increased confidence that will be generated by an attempt to live within our means, and by a general desire on the part of all sections of the community to make sacrifices to attain that end. It will take a great deal more than these puny efforts to- bring about a general revival of confidence.

It has been urged with a good deal of truth that the immediate cause of our troubles is overborrowing combined with more or less extravagant spending. Honorable senators on this side of the chamber have often been twitted with having, said nothing in the nature of condemnation of further borrowing. It has been claimed that our present attitude towards further borrowing is a new-found zeal on our part, and that we have never hitherto advocated anything of the kind. It was 40 years ago last month that I had the honour to be elected a member of the New South Wales Parliament. I was one of the first Labour members to be returned. Not long ‘afterwards I sounded awarning note against the prevalence of borrowing. The indebtedness of New South Wales was then about £51,000,000. It is now approaching £220,000,000. At that time New South Wales had enormous land revenues from rentals and instalments of conditional purchase money, and I claimed that it would be a good policy if expenditure on public works was limited to the amount of those funds which were treated as though they were income, and not part of the capital of the country, as they really were. I said that that would be much preferable to going into debt for the construction of public works. I have mentioned this to show that I for one could see the evils of unlimited borrowing 40 years ago.

Subsequently, at a Labour conference I succeeded in having a motion carried against any further borrowing. That resolution was afterwards watered down by so many exceptions that it was utterly useless, and I admit it has never been acted upon. One Minister of the Crown, not a Labour Minister, had justified borrowing on the ground that in prosperous times we can afford it, and in bad times it is absolutely necessary. There are certain works which cannot become immediately reproductive but yet are eminently desirable, and in. my opinion it is quite legitimate to borrow to carry them out. But while that may be so in the case of the individual who wishes to extend his business or improve his property, it is not necessarily so in regard to the State. I contend that by the utilization of our own credit, by destroying private banking and all the evils associated with it, we could find adequate means for financing any necessary works, say for defence or improvements, without imposing any interest burden on the community. Until the people generally are sufficiently alive to insist upon that policy being carried into effect, we shall continue to suffer as we do now from recurring commercial crises.

While borrowing may have accentuated our troubles far more fundamental causes have brought about our present position. Every country in the world which becomes industrialized is continually seeking foreign markets on account of the restricted purchasing power of its own people, brought about largely by the fact that machinery is displacing manual labour. The world is thus losing at both ends. On the one hand there is a continually increasing number of industrialized countries producing by machinery an excess of commodities which they formerly imported; on the other there are fewer markets for the disposal of the surplus products of these countries. Such a state of affairs must inevitably lead sooner or later to a collapse of the whole system. If we in Australia succeed in producing more woollen goods or cotton goods than are sufficient to meet our own requirements, we must try to find a market for our surplus. When we reach that stage we shall find that it will pay us best to engage in mass production. If some firms make profits in that way others will seek to emulate their example. As a consequence Australia’s production will speedily overtake local requirements, and we shall need to seek for markets abroad. When we do so we shall have here what happened in Great Britain, which we know was the first country in the world to develop the modern factory system. By such inventions as the steam engine, the power loom, and the spinning jenny, and by the adoption of special means of transportation, Great Britain succeeded in building up an enormous and profitable trade with almost the whole of the world, particularly in textile goods. In course of time other countries set out to emulate Great Britain, and started the manufacture of those goods for themselves. In the end, Great Britain, instead of exporting textiles as its principal line, began to send to foreign countries machinery for the manufacture in those countries of their local requirements in textiles. And by and by, when those countries became further industrialized, they commenced to manufacture their own machinery. The process has been going on in an increasing number of countries until, finally, the production of goods has exceeded the world’s demand.

While competition may be a good thing for the individual who succeeds by his ability in knocking out his fellow competitors, and in that way secures a monopoly, it inevitably results in others attempting the same methods.

The cry for a cheapening in the cost of production has no permanent advantage to any of those concerned in its operation. In the first place, Australia starts out by saying that it cannot compete with Europe because the wages here are higher than they are in Europe, and, therefore, our wages must be reduced to the European level. There are, of course, other elements to be taken into consideration, such as distance from markets and so forth; but by a general reduction in wages we may succeed in increasing our ability to compete with other nations. We find, however, that Great Britain, not satisfied with the profits made largely in past years, is investing its surplus capital in opening up manufactures in countries where labour is a good deal cheaper than it is in any part of Europe. In India and China, not only have millions of spindles been put into operation in the textile industry, but also iron and steel production is being carried on in competition with Great Britain. It is, therefore, not sufficient for us merely to reduce our standard of wages to the European level if we are to be permanently successful competitors in the world markets ; and, notwithstanding the reproof administered to me the other day by Senator Herbert Hays, I still maintain that we must come down to the coolie level; because coolies are now manufacturing at coolie wages. While European nations, particularly Great Britain, have invested tremendous capital sums in the establishment of mills in India and to some extent “in China, it is Indian or Chinese labour that does the work at such a low fate of wage that we cannot expect to compete unless we come down to the same level.

Senator Sir William Glasgow:

– The honorable ‘ senator does not suggest that the efficiency of the coolie is anything like that of the Australian.

Senator Crawford:

– In many industries it is a matter of touching a button and the machine does the rest.

Senator RAE:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP; LANG LAB from 1931

– I have already touched briefly on the enormous displacement of human labour by machinery. It is indisputable that where labour is phenomenally cheap compared with our standard, it pays in many instances not to use machines. The low cost of labour is more than sufficient to counteract the value of the machines.

Senator Sir William Glasgow:

– That is so in Egypt.

Senator RAE:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP; LANG LAB from 1931

– While cheap labour is comparatively inefficient, and it may take six Indians or Chinese to equal the efficiency of a skilled European, six or even ten Chinese can be employed for the wages a well-paid European would demand.

Senator DUNCAN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– If all communities were paid at that wage there would be no production, because no one could afford to buy what was produced.

Senator RAE:

The charge which we make against this Government is that it definitely promised it would remedy the existing social evils without recourse to these economy proposals. It made this declaration time after time, even up to a few weeks ago. Consequently, its abject surrender to the Nationalist party, which has always contended that these sacrifices should be made’ by the workers and our pensioners, is a cowardly abrogation of its pledges in order to prevent its ejection from the treasury bench.

Senator McLachlan:

– It was a surrender to a much greater power than the Nationalist party - the stress of economic circumstances.

SenatorRAE. - It was a surrender to the power of the banking institutions which the honorable senator represents in this chamber. When a Labour Government tamely accepts the policy dictated by its political opponents and the banking institutions, I, and those who are with me in this matter, are justified, notwithstanding the slur attempted to be cast on us by Senator Lynch, in dissociating ourselves from the party which supports it. We foreswear our allegiance to a government which has betrayed its trust and surrendered everything for which it stood. As has been pointed out by previous speakers, we cannot expect to restore prosperity by reducing wages. On the contrary, we shall merely add to the already large army of unemployed, because a -reduction of wages destroys the purchasing power of the people. Con sequently, it is a stupid policy from start to finish. For these reasons I am definitely opposed to this piece of iniquitous legislation.

Senator DUNCAN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– I do not know how long it would take to put into effective operation throughout the country the “ share and share alike “ principle advocated by Senator Bae. I am afraid that, before the scheme was properly inaugurated, Australia would have reached a position from which it would be impossible to emerge successfully. Although the proposals contained in this measure are a contradiction of many of the things I have held dear for many years, I must temporarily relinquish them in the interests of the nation. Consequently, I shall vote, although very reluctantly, for the second reading of this bill, at the same time expressing the hope that the application of the remedies contained in it, and the measures which are complementary to it, will result in the solution of our problems and the dawn of a brighter and better future.

Senator DOOLEY:
Assistant Minister · New South “Wales · ALP

– There is one aspect of the subject under discussion which I feel should be placed before honorable senators. There is an impression that those soldiers who have suffered war injuries will have their pensions reduced. That is not so. As honorable senators are aware, a committee was appointed to consider the question of soldiers’ pensions. Having made certain proposals which would result in a saving of £1,018,230 per annum, the committee stated -

The conference recognizes that the surrendering of the aforementioned amount was essential to the success of the rehabilitation plan, and, whilst the said proposal will doubtless occasion considerable inconvenience to those concerned, they will accept the sacrifice entailed with a view to assisting in expediting the restoration of prosperity in Australia.

The proposals submitted by the conference of presidents of returned soldiers’ associations, as accepted by the Commonwealth Government, have the following effect : -

Honorable senators will see that disabled soldiers, war widows and orphans, and widowed mothers of unmarried men who have died from war causes, are not touched by this bill. The proposals submitted by the conference were signed by -

J. C. Dyett, Federal President, Returned Sailors and Soldiers Imperial League of Australia.
J. Chambers, Federal President, Tubercular Sailors and Soldiers Association.
1. Martin Farrow, Federal President, Limbless Soldiers Association.
. J. Lynch, Acting Federal President, Blinded Soldiers Association.
Hetherington, Federal President, Partially Blinded Soldiers Association.
J. Brosnan, Secretary, Totally and Partially Incapacitated Soldiers Association..

I endorse all that Senator Johnston hae said in regard to the invidious treatment that has been meted out to the goldmining industry. Had all bounties been reduced equally, I should have had no objection to offer. I could name several industries that have received hundreds of thousands of pounds from the public purse without having rendered anything like a commensurate service. If in their case, the bounty were entirely suspended, I do not consider that such action would be too drastic.

There are several other features in the bill, but they can be dealt with more appropriately in committee. I shall, therefore, reserve for that stage any further remarks that I may desire to make.

Senator BARNES:
VicePresident of the Executive Council · Victoria · ALP

– A great deal has been said in regard to the old-age pensioners and crippled soldiers, and many crocodile tears have been shed on their behalf. The situation that confronted the Government was that, at the middle of July, the oldage pensioner would receive only 12s. 8 week, and, after that, nothing, unless drastic action was taken. The crippled soldier would have been affected in a similar manner. Consequently, it had the choice of making this provision, or of allowing the stage to be reached when it would not be possible to make any payment.

What was the Government to do? Is there any one who will say that it should have run away from its plain duty, and have prevented the old-age pensioner and the crippled soldier from obtaining what it is now offering? This country was “ broke “ long before the present Government came into power, and when the Government assumed office it could not raise one shilling anywhere.

Senator Thompson:

– It had a similar choice last August.

Senator BARNES:

– I know that it had that choice last August. It then brought forward measures which it considered would remove the difficulties with which it was confronted; but those measures were rejected by the Senate. I do not question the right of the Senate to take that action. It did not believe that the proper remedies were proposed, and, having the power to prevent them from Being given effect, it naturally acted in that way. The Government, however, believed that, had they been given effect, they would have pulled Australia through. Eventually, it found itself with its back to the wall, and it had to retreat, as the soldiers did from Mons. It could not take money from the people who own it without their consent, unless it declared a state of war. If one individual wishes to borrow from another, he must prove that he is a sound person, and that he will carry out his obligations and undertakings. Nations occupy a similar position. If Australia can convince England that she is “ dead right,” and so impress her that she will lend us £20,000,000 or £30,000,000, what will be the effect? There are between 40,000 and 50,000 members of my organization tramping Australia to-day without a “ bob.” God knows how the wives and families of some of them are living. There is something in the contention that it is necessary to establish credit. If we establish our credit, and procure the wherewithal to pull these men off the roads of Australia, and put them into productive work, shall we not be doing some service to this country? lt has been argued that, by these reductions, we shall lessen the purchasing power of the people, and, consequently, cause a greater number of men to be thrown out of work. May I put the other side? If we can place in work the 360,000 men who are now on the tramp, even at the reduced wage provided for iu this bill, will not that cause a stream of money to flow into the industries of this country, and thus double the purchasing power of the people, with a consequent stimulation of industry and business?

I repeat that the choice lay between what has been provided and nothing at all. The situation must be faced with the greatest stoicism.

Question - That the bill be now read a second time - put. The Senate divided.

AYES: 25

NOES: 4

Majority . . . . 21

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

In committee:

Clauses 1 and 2 agreed to.

Progress reported.

page 3889

COMMONWEALTH DEBT CONVERSION BILL

Bill returned from the House of Representatives with the following message : -

The House of Representatives returns to the Senate the bill entituled “ A bill for an act to provide for the conversion of the internal public debts of the Commonwealth and the States, and for other purposes “, and acquaints the Senate that the House of Representatives has agreed to Nos. I, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 10, 17 and 18 of the amendments made by. the Senate; has agreed to amendments Nos. 2 and 5 with amendments, and has agreed to amendment No. 6 with a consequential amendment, as shown in the annexed schedule.

The House of Representatives’ desires the concurrence of the Senate in the amendments and in the consequential amendment made by the House of Representatives to the amendments of the Senate.

In committee: ( Consider ation of House of Representatives message).

Clause 12 -

Senate’s amendment. - At end of clause add the following nowsub-clauses: - . (5.) Commonwealth Government inscribed stock for which existing securities are exchanged under either of the last two preceding sub-sections, and Commonwealth Government inscribed stock in respect of which dissent is signified in accordance with this act, shall not, except as prescribed, be exchangeable for bonds or any other form of security. (6.) Commonwealth Government inscribed stock for which existing securities are exchanged under sub-section (3.) or sub-section (4.) of this section shall not be deemed to be new securities within the meaning of this act.

House of Representatives’ message. - Amendment amended as follows: -

By inserting before the word “ bonds “, new sub-clause 5, the word “ Commonwealth “; and by inserting before the word “ security “ new sub-clause 5, the word “ Commonwealth “.

Motion (by Senator Dooley) agreed to-

That the amendment made by the House of Representatives be agreed to.

Clause 14 - (5.) New securities issued in accordance with the provisions of the last preceding subsection (other than new securities bearing interest at four per centum per annum) shall be issued only in the form of inscribed stock.

Senate’s amendment. - After the word “ stock “ add the words “ and shall not be exchangeable for bonds or any other form of security “.

House of Representatives’message: -

Amendment amended as follows - By inserting before the word “ bonds “ the word “ Commonwealth “ ; andby inserting before the word “ security”, the word “ Commonwealth “.

Motion (by Senator Dooley) agreed to-

That the House of Representatives’ amendment he agreed to.

Clause 15 - (1.) New securities issued in exchange for existing securities held by a Government Savings Bank shall mature upon the original date of maturity of the existing securities if the Treasurer of the Commonwealth or the State concerned and the Savings Bank so agree, but otherwise shall be subject to the provisions of this act. (2.) A Government Savings Bank in this section means any of the following institutions, namely: - The Commonwealth Savings Bank of Australia, the Government Savings

Bank of New South Wales, the State Savings Bank of Victoria, the Savings Bank of South Australia and the State Savings Bank of Western Australia.

Senate’s amendment. - Leave out the word “Government”, sub-clause (1), and subclause (2) first occurring.

House of Representatives’ message - Amendment agreed to with the following consequential amendment - Leave out the word “ or “, sub-clause ( 1 ) , and insert the words “ and the Treasurer of “.

Senator DOOLEY:
Assistant Minister · New South Wales · ALP

– I move -

That the consequential amendment made by the House of Representatives be agreed to.

At the outset the Treasurer was not prepared to accept this amendment, but after debate he adopted the suggestion made by the Leader of the Opposition in another place that the State Treasurer and the Commonwealth Treasurershould act jointly in the matter.

Senator Thompson:

– I think I made that suggestion in the Senate, but the Leader of the Opposition in another place is welcome to it.

Senator DOOLEY:

– As the onus of finding money to redeem the bonds is on the Commonwealth Treasurer, he is entitled to participate in the deliberations. This amendment will place the Hobart Savings Bank and the Bank for Savings, Launceston, on the same footing as other government savings banks in the various States.

Senator PAYNE:
Tasmania

– The amendments made by another place are not consequential. Each savings bank will be placed in exactly the same position. If the amendment -is acceptable to the Senate, the position will be that, whereas, previously, certain things could be done if the Treasurer of the Commonwealth, or the Treasurer of the State concerned, and the savings bank agreed, it is now provided that the Treasurer of the Commonwealth, and the Treasurer of the State concerned, as well as the savings bank, must agree. There must now be agreement between three parties, including the Treasurer of the Commonwealth, whereas, previously, that was not so. Seeing that the amendment places all banks on the same footing, it is acceptable to me.

Senator DOOLEY:
New South WalesAssistant Minister · ALP

.-With regard to the point raised by Senator Payne, the position under the amendment will be that, so far as negotiations with the banks are concerned, they will all be on the same footing.

Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE (Western Australia) [10.17]. - I desire to point out that the message from the House of Representatives justifies my criticism of Senator Payne’s amendment, that if the Treasurer of the State and’ the savings bank agreed, they could present to the Government a proposal regarding the maturity date of bonds. I then pointed out that, while that might be satisfactory in the case of government savings banks, it might not be so in the case of private institutions controlled by committees of citizens. What the Government has done in another place has overcome that objection. The consent of the Treasurer of the Commonwealth, as “’ well as that of the Treasurer of the State, must now be obtained. The original amendment provided that if the Treasurer of a State and the bank agreed, they could call upon the Commonwealth to meet the securities on the original date of maturity.

Senator Payne:

– They will be all placed on the same footing now.

Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE.Yes; the position is different from what it would have been under the honorable senator’s amendment.

Motion agreed to.

Resolutions reported; report adopted.

page 3891

INVALID AND OLD-AGE PENSIONS APPROPRIATION BILL 1931

Bill received from the House of Representatives and (on motion by Senator Barnes) read a first time.

page 3891

ADJOURNMENT

Australia’s Indebtedness in London - General Post Office, Sydney - Embargo on Potatoes from Western Australia.

Motion (by Senator Barnes) proposed.

That tho Senate do now adjourn.

Senator Sir GEORGE PEARCE (West the Leader of the Government the following questions, upon notice: -

Has he noticed in yesterday’s, issue of the Canberra Times newspaper a reported cable reading as follows: - London, Monday. Th& financial writer of the Daily Herald says:, “ Australia has every reason to congratulate herself on the remarkable performance of reducing the London indebtedness by £21,000,000. The Treasurer (Mr. Theodore) has every reason to take pride in the fact”?

Is it a fact that the London indebtedness of the Commonwealth has been reduced by £21,000,000?

I received the following reply: -

Yes.

Apparently the cable refers to the reduced amounts owing to the Westminster Bank and the public in London in respect of short-term indebtedness (including overdrafts) of the Australian .Governments. As shown in thebudget speech there has been a reduction of. £12,000,000 in this indebtedness.

As that reply was news to me, I turned! to the budget speech delivered by theTreasurer (Mr. Theodore) last week,, where I read that the honorable gentleman said’ -

Owing to the inability of the Loan Council to obtain long-dated loans overseas, the requirements of the Governments, up to the 31st August, 1930, were financed by means of bank overdrafts and short-dated treasury bills issued to the public. After that date the Government expenditures were met by remittances which were made possible by the pooling oi London exchange by the Australian banks under an arrangement with the Loan Council. The Governments are given first call upon accumulated Australian resources in London by virtue of this arrangement. The unfunded debt at the 31st August, 1930, which has since remained constant, totalled £38,075,000, and was held as follows: -

Now, in answer to. a question I am told, “ As shown in the budget speech there has been a reduction of £12,900,000 in this indebtedness.” Honorable senators will see that that reply conflicts with the statement by the Treasurer that, “ The unfunded debt at the 31st August, 1930, which has since remained constant, totalled £38,075,000.” I suggest to Ministers that they should take care that their replies to questions are borne out by the references used in support of them.

Senator DUNN:
New South Wales

.- On behalf of the citizens of

Sydney, I direct attention to the latest action of the postal authorities in relation to the General Post Office, Sydney. For over 25 years the clock in the tower of that building has been lighted nightly, but now, in order to save £111 per annum, the decree has gone forth that the clock faces are not to be illuminated at night.

Senator Sir George Pearce:

– What a hardship !

Senator DUNN:

– It is a hardship, seeing that so many of the citizens of Sydney in these hard times have had to pawn their watches. In order to save a small sum, the Government is prepared to rob the citizens of Sydney.

Senator Sir George Pearce:

– If Mr. Lang would pay his interest it would be possible for the Government to pay for the lighting of the clock faces.

Senator DUNN:

– If the Commonwealth Government were to adopt the Lang plan, every clock in Australia could be lighted day and night. From a conversation which I have had with the Postmaster-General (Mr. A. Green) I understand that any local authority may install a clock in any post office tower. It is a standing disgrace to the Government that the principal city of Australia, which has a population of 1,250,000 persons, should be without a lighted post office clock, unless the local City Counail is prepared to bear the expense of lighting it. The Government must indeed be in sore straits if it has to resort to such petty practices.

Senator LYNCH:
Western Australia

– I desire to refer to the action of the New South Wales Government in prohibiting the importation of certain commodities, particularlypotatoes, from Western Australia. So far as I am aware, New South Wales is the only State that has placed such an embargo on potatoes from Western Australia, the reason given being that there is a danger of the lucerne flea being introduced from that State. I think there is still some authority which the Commonwealth Government can exercise to inquire into State regulations, and disallow any which may be frivolous or unwarranted. For years the western State has been a profitable dumping ground for the potatoes of every other State, and very little restriction has been imposed by it. But now that it has for the first time advanced to the point of being able to supply not only its own potato requirements, but also, to their great advantage, the requirements of some of the eastern States, these regulations have been brought into force. I regard them as a clear interference with trade between the States. Against that the Constitution imposes a bar, unless there is substantial ground for such interference. The purpose of my remarks to-night is to direct attention to the imposition of these regulations by New South Wales alone. There is no warrant for this interference, and it is clearly something which was barred by the framers of our Constitution. I hope that the Government will take notice of my complaint, and that it will institute some inquiry into this action of the State of New South Wales, which has imposed a hardship on producers in Western Australia, who, for the first time, are in a position to supply potatoes of the first quality to consumers in the Eastern States.

Senator DUNCAN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– As a representative of New South Wales, I cannot allow Senator Lynch to reflect upon the officials of that State acting in a public capacity. Anyone listening to the honorable senator would imagine that the State itself had suddenly determined that nothing whatever was to be imported from Western Australia, because of some set it has against the western State.

Senator Thompson:

– Is the honorable senator proud of the administration in New South Wales to-day?

Senator DUNCAN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

– It is not a matter of State administration. It is a matter of protecting the State from the importation of something which the officials rightly or wrongly believe will be a serious menace to its lucerne fields. I gather from the press that one or two shipments of potatoes from Western Australia have been discovered by the officials of the Agricultural Department of New South Wales, reputable and honorable men, to be infested with the lucerne flea, and that it is felt that the distribution of those potatoes would so infest the lucerne fields that it would not be possible to eradicate the pest. The fact that potatoes are freely imported into New South Wales from Tasmania, Victoria and Queens land, indicates that there is no desire on the part of the State to protect its own potato-growers against importations. I think that State officials, instead of being condemned, should be commended for acting in the interest of the State by endcavouring to protect it from the importation of pests, and I suggest that Senator Lynch should approach theWestern Australian Government in order to secure proper supervision of shipments of potatoes, so that potatoes infested with the lucerne flea may not be shipped to any other part of Australia.

Senator DOOLEY:
New South WalesAssistant Minister · ALP

– I shall interview the Minister for Markets in regard to the matter raised by Senator Lynch, and if there is any statement of importance to be made concerning it, will furnish it to the honorable senator.

Senator BARNES:
VicePresident of the ExecutiveCouncil · Victoria · ALP

– With reference to Senator Dunn’s criticism of the Postmaster- General for having issued instructions to cease the lighting of the General Post Office clock in Sydney, I should think that New South Wales is big enough to look after its own clocks.

If the right honorable the Leader of the Opposition will look at the front page of the budget, he will find that Australia in August, 1930, owed £7,900,000 to the Westminster Bank and £10,000,000 to the public by way of short-term indebtedness, and that it has now reduced the indebtedness to the Westminster Bank by £2,900,000, and the debt to the public by £10,000,000. This reduces the total indebtedness to the Westminster Bank and the public in London by £12,900,000, which I mentioned in my reply to the right honorable senator’s question.

Senator Sir George Pearce:

– According to the budget the short-term indebtedness of £38,000,000 has remained constant at that figure. If there has been . any change it must have been brought about merely by a transfer from the Westminster Bank to other banks.

Senator BARNES:

– That is all the information I can give the honorable senator at this juncture.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Senate adjourned at 10.43 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 15 July 1931, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1931/19310715_senate_12_131/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

Senate15 July 1931

MACMILLAN REPORT

Senator BARNES:Vice-President of the Executive Council · VICTORIA · ALP

Senator Sir George Pearce:

QUESTION

UNEMPLOYED WAR PENSIONERS IN CANBERRA

Senator COOPER:QUEENSLAND

Senator BARNES:ALP

Senator FOLL:QUEENSLAND

Senator BARNES:

Senator DOOLEY:Assistant Minister assisting the Minister for Works and Railways · New South WalesAssistant Minister · ALP

QUESTION

REPORT ON COMMUNISM

Senator THOMPSON:QUEENSLAND

Senator BARNES:ALP

QUESTION

HOME PURCHASERSSUPERANNUATION SCHEME

Senator FOLL:

Senator BARNES:ALP

QUESTION

WAR SERVICE HOMES: EVICTIONS

Senator DUNN:NEW SOUTH WALES

Senator BARNES:ALP

QUESTION

CANADIAN TRADE TREATY

Senator FOLL:QUEENSLAND · NAT; UAP from 1931

Senator BARNES:ALP

QUESTION

COMMONWEALTH PUBLIC SERVANTS

Senator BARNES:ALP

QUESTION

NEW SOUTH WALES GOVERNMENT LOTTERY

Senator BARNES:ALP

QUESTION

AUSTRALIA’S LONDON INDEBTEDNESS

Senator BARNES:ALP

QUESTION

INDEBTEDNESS OF NEW SOUTH WALES

Senator LYNCH:WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator BARNES:ALP

FINANCIAL EMERGENCY BILL

Second Reading

Senator HOARE:South Australia

Senator Rae:

Senator HOARE:

Senator Foll:

Senator HOARE:

Senator Foll:

Senator HOARE:

Senator Thompson:

Senator HOARE:

Senator Thompson:

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon W Kingsmill:WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator HOARE:

Senator Foll:

Senator HOARE:

Senator Thompson:

Senator HOARE:

Senator Rae:

Senator HOARE:

Senator DUNCAN:NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator HOARE:

Senator DUNCAN:NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator HOARE:

Senator Reid:

Senator HOARE:

Senator Guthrie:

Senator HOARE:

Senator Thompson:

Senator HOARE:

Senator Payne:

Senator HOARE:

Senator Payne:

Senator HOARE:

Senator Payne:

Senator HOARE:

The PRESIDENT:

Senator HOARE:

Senator Guthrie:

Senator HOARE:

Senate
15 July 1931

Senator BARNES:
Vice-President of the Executive Council · VICTORIA · ALP

Senator COOPER:
QUEENSLAND

Senator BARNES:
ALP

Senator FOLL:
QUEENSLAND

Senator DOOLEY:
Assistant Minister assisting the Minister for Works and Railways · New South WalesAssistant Minister · ALP

Senator THOMPSON:
QUEENSLAND

Senator BARNES:
ALP

Senator BARNES:
ALP

Senator DUNN:
NEW SOUTH WALES

Senator BARNES:
ALP

Senator FOLL:
QUEENSLAND · NAT; UAP from 1931

Senator BARNES:
ALP

Senator BARNES:
ALP

Senator BARNES:
ALP

Senator BARNES:
ALP

Senator LYNCH:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator BARNES:
ALP

Senator HOARE:
South Australia

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon W Kingsmill:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator DUNCAN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator DUNCAN:
NEW SOUTH WALES · NAT

Senator KNEEBONE:
South Australia

Senator PAYNE:
Tasmania

Senator DUNN:
New South Wales

Senator BARNES:
ALP

Senator LYNCH:
Western Australia